there is a natural moment there. thank you, madam clerk. we have a full list and complement. i should ask in that federation of proposals. in the categories of non- population areas to visit, the only one i have listed is golden gate park. are there others? commissioner pilpel: i was hoping at some point, time permitting today or saturday that we would walk through the lines quickly and see if there are things on the border of the consultant has identified, have issues. i do not think that would take too long. there will be a couple of things that come up. the things that jump to mind are the line between nine and 10, 101 bayshore.

there are a couple of those little thingies, not significant population issues at all. chairman mcdonnell: they might have some implications. any other non-population considerations? ok, thank you. let me then take us to the most significant of the list from my perspective. that is treasure island. commissioner pilpel: by concern i am looking some more at the populations and what is off is that eight is too big but we're

relatively constrained so that is relatively locked down. three, however, there are three areas that we can still catch, two of which were already referenced which are russian hill and the tenderloin area and the third that occurred to me today, looking at all this carefully is the possibility of treasure island from 6 to 3. it occurred to me the development projects in six are rather significant in terms of workload. with the sea wall locked in 37, the proposal that came out last week that that will take a considerable amount of time, the transbay terminal, other issues in south beach, mission bay, there is a lot of development

there, at least taking the treasure island project and moving that to three might better balance development projects on the east side. i'm wondering if the consultant can identify the population on treasure island and the resulting deviation in three and six and let me think about what that means. >> that is the population of 2880 people. moving it would bring the population of district 3 up 2.74% in the population for district 6, and -3.07%. chairman mcdonnell: i want to give people time to think about that knowing that will have

other implications. it also would allow some further tweaking in russian hill and the tenderloin that other members have expressed great interest in. it was not my preference to do this. i know it is another last-minute thing. is it a proposal? i will so proposed. any discussion before a call the question? >> this is something i would have proposed if we were contemplating large changes we talked about the portola. this would be one of the things that i would have proposed we would have done to change the portola. at this point it would cost all kinds of major domino effect. i do not know if i am ready to

do that. i would rather concentrate on this small tweaking peaces -- pieces. >> this is about contiguity. i understand the concept of water contiguity is possible for us to consider. could we just hear a short recap on the issues of contiguity with respect to treasure island, noting that it is not contiguous with district 3, i imagine it is water contiguous so if we could get a refresher on that quickly. chairman mcdonnell: sure. ms. mcdonald. >> we look at this question

early on and determined the task force is not legally prohibited from removing treasure island to district 3. their arguments is water contiguous. it is an option on the table from the contiguity perspective but you want to have some explanation for why you would do it as contiguous, for you to make that change. >> just to -- based on that, not solely based on that but it is helpful to have that. i sort of agree with member melara with for we are in the process given that -- where we are in the process. it is not in do not think it is an issue for us to have considered more seriously but hindsight is 20-20 and i think at this point, it is awkward for us to make a proposal to move treasure island into district 3. i do think that in the future,

our successors 10 years from now, this does represent to me an intriguing possibility for a future task force to consider as one possibility for moving population to balance out the imbalance that may exist at that time between the southern part of the city and the northern part of the city. i am comfortable leaving it at that and therefore would not support the proposal at this time. commissioner schreiber: thank you. my point of view is starting off with a significant change solely for the purpose of population -- unless there is an overriding reason to who make the change which donohue -- based on comments. the only testimony we have had

consistent with respect to treasure island is the community that shares of with six rather than three. we have heard that from the supervisor and other community organizations. i would not supported at this time if it becomes necessary to change to achieve some overriding goal with respect to neighborhoods we're trying to keep together. i might put it on the table at this point. chairman mcdonnell: thank you very much. >> i do not think i would entertain moving treasure island to district 3. i seem to recall testimony that treasure island residents to share services with district 6 and right now, i do not think

there is a relationship with treasure island residents with district 3. i would have entertained this if we were going to seriously discuss a move of portola to district 10, that would have been a possibility. i thought we agreed last week or last monday, whenever the last meeting was, that we were going to focus on the tweaks and the smaller moves. this is i think a major move. i would not support it. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. anyone else? as we have done with each proposal -- are we done with each proposal? commissioner tidwell: no. mr. schreiber, no. ms. mondejar, no. ms. melara, no, mr. leigh, no. mr. alonso, no.

chairman mcdonnell: are you prepared to have us look at some population data information? >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: but go to the population data on north mission and 14th street, what ever is easier for you to get to. >> we do not have filipino population. what we do have is the major population groups that are reported in the senses. we have latino and asians but not sub groups such as the appeals -- filipinos or koreans or chinese within this group. >> we can look at the latino or asian trade we have surname matched -- we can look at the latino or asian. we have surname matched filipino. which one would like to see

first? which population group? chairman mcdonnell: latino. >> as you can see this as percent latino population. the darker the color, the higher the population. this is the area around cayuga. cayuga is right here and you see the district boundary in black. chairman mcdonnell: i will start with you with any questions

related to the data she sharing. >> this is the present latino population. the black line is that andrea. the darker the red, the higher the latino published -- personages by block. this street here in the center is cayuga and to have the 280 freeway -- you have the 280 freeway right here. chairman mcdonnell: any questions relevant to this data? >> what is the darkest blocke? >> it is 50% to 75% latino. chairman mcdonnell: any other questions related to this data? ok.

>> what is the total population [inaudible] >> just one second. >> sure. that is the population of 838 people. would you like to hear the deviation? >> yes, please. >> this would be the deviation in their work to go back into 11. -- if it were to go back into 11. the deviation of district 11 would be 6.08% and a deviation for district 8 would be 2.3%. >> one more time? >> d8, 2.3%. chairman mcdonnell: any other

questions related to this data? can we go to the asian data? >> this is percent asian population. the darker the area is shaded, the higher the asian population. this particular area that jamie is pointing over is between 50% and 75%. chairman mcdonnell: any questions related to this data?

that is between three and a 65 people. the deviation would be 5.44%. -- that would be 365 people. chairman mcdonnell: can you open the back door? someone is there. you stay. nice try. any other questions related to this data?

hearing none, is their proposal related to -- there a proposal related to these communities? >> could we hear the other two and think about it a little bit? chairman mcdonnell: sure. could we go to the other -- north mission? latino population first and then the asian population. >> which area would you like to have described? the 16th street and up area or 15th?

>> 15th and up. >> this is the highest population, 75% to 100% latino. there is a few blocks there. the next lighter color is 50% to 75%. chairman mcdonnell: any questions related to the stated -- this data? let's change to asian, please. >> so this is the asian population as reported by the senses. this is 16th street and there is one dark shaded block and it is 50% to 75% asian and a slightly wider block above is 40% to 50% and goes lower from there.

-- lighter block above is 40% to 50% and goes lower from there. >> that is north of van ness? >> that is bounded by 16th street, and van ness. chairman mcdonnell: chairman mcdonnell: back to the question of the proposal related to kayuga. >> can i claire if i something on the bottom side? that area is completely isolated from both the outer mission -- it's actually connected more to glen park, because in that area there is a big wall. when you go down mission

street, before you get to tingley, the wall just drops, and that area is isolated from the outer mission, and really they are more of part of glen park than the outer mission. my mother owns a house in that area, so i know it very well. >> thank you. chairman mcdonnell: is there a proposal related to this area >> no proposal yet, but i wanted to hear about the other two pieces. i was interested in possibly rotating a bit in this area. chairman mcdonnell: i am not sure what you mean by the other two pieces. i'm sorry? >> the other out of st. luke's and the area along the 9-11

border to see if there is a population count near 800 that could allow a rotation there. chairman mcdonnell: let's begin with the most significant piece she promised moving. let's start there. >> ok. chairman mcdonnell: if there is not support to do that, then finding the alternative doesn't matter. >> ok. well it seemed to me -- chairman mcdonnell: so you proposed this? paint a verbal picture so people can appreciate where you are going. >> what i am thinking, if we can zoom out for a moment, for lack of a better term, the tingley we have been discussing, put that back in, and took some population out of st. luke's and randall that we have talked about, the last meeting at least, and put that from nine into eight -- is that how that works?

[inaudible] >> i understand, but it is possibly undoing some of that so as to restore the line along 280. it is a possibility, and i'm not ready to present it yet. i am looking if this works. you would have to go north there, over there, and then from nine into 11 along stony brook, stoney ford, stoney-something and madison, into 11, to rotate in a clock wise fashion. and if there are probably 800 people in each chunk, then that works. that is what i am frying to determine. chairman mcdonnell: and the rotation solving? >> if it is appropriate to have the ti inch gley cut-out at 11

or if there should be a border cut there. we have had different things relative to that border. chairman mcdonnell: ok. any questions with regard to understanding the intended rotation? finish your thought. >> i was going to ask if we could look at the population west of mission to see if the numbers are there. if they are, then it is worth further talking about. if they aren't, then it is not worth further talking about. chairman mcdonnell: sure. >> the speaker we heard earlier tonight, i would like to include that block as well. starting at guerrero and 27th -- no -- yes, correct. wait. the southwest block, but not the northwest block, where were

-- where you were just then. >> this is a population of 101 people. >> right. and then the line west of valencia -- >> starting where? >> from testify any, east of tiffany, south of there, there you go. that's the area i was looking at. >> that is a population of 824 people. deviation of district eight and nine. >> roughly 800. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. and then the last bit would be down on the 9-11 line. the excelsor and portollo zones

west of stony brook, and then south of there as well. if we go one block west of the selected block, and then south of there, the funny-looking block. not that one. nothing perm. west of moderate son and northwest of alma, thank you, and further south of there, peru.

>> that is a population of 590. >> i'm just trying to see if there is something that can get to 800-ish. >> maybe that other funny-looking block there north of silver. >> that would be a population of 1,013. >> and if we de-selected the block in the middle? >> 805 people. >> there you go. that would be i think the three-way move. >> just for purposes of everyone's consideration, what are you resolving fore? >> restore the border along 280. it would make for a cleaner border between eight and nine south of st. luke's, and it keeps all the percentages roughly as they are now.

chairman mcdonnell: ms. tidwell? the general motion. we will get to specifics in a moment. >> i would like to say no, but i would like to consider st. luke's separately. chairman mcdonnell: mr. schreiber? >> i am not ready for this, or maybe ever. chairman mcdonnell: in the interest of moving our decision-making forward, the not-yets don't actually help us. if not-yet if there is a subset of the proposal i would like to consider or if the not-yet means i would like to consider something else, state what the something else. let me start over one more time. ms. tidwell? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: and what you would like to look at? >> st. luke's. chairman mcdonnell: mr. schreiber? >> my answer is still no, but if other task force members

present compelling ropes, my vote is no right now. chairman mcdonnell: thank you so much. i am going to marry you off to someone before these are over. ms. mondejar. >> no. chairman mcdonnell: no, never? >> no to this proposal. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. ms. lam, for clarification, the stoney ford for stony brook move for the 9-11 border would go into -- >> from nine -- >> from 11 to nine. >> right. >> and then bringing the

tingley out of eight into 11. we need to see the population variance for those two moves. i am not interested in the st. luke's move. i don't know if that would get us close enough. >> what he identified in the rotation were three, relatively-speaking approximately 800 populations. that is the puzzle move. >> no. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. mrs. mondejar. -- m's melara. i am not interested in changing our decision we made last time, primarily we made it very deliberately. when the community comes tonight and says you took away this piece, they were not taking into consideration what it would cost elsewhere in their district. we moved something in their district, and next week the people will come back saying you shouldn't have done that. so let's leave it where it is. so no, no, no.

chairman mcdonnell: thank you. that's clear. mr. leigh? >> can i ask a question? does the second move require moving st. luke's? chairman mcdonnell: no. the intent is to keep st. luke's in district nine. it has no -- nothing to do with st. luke's present site at all, period. >> i would actually be open to looking at it. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. mr. alonso? >> i second that thought, yes. chairman mcdonnell: ok. that's it. for both the reasons that mrs. melara indicated, which is we made decisions with forethought in mind and with all considerations and the considerations and the unfortunate reality as we have